We do fundamentally disagree. From my perspective, i will take the proven 50 year old and the high probability of 15 years of success versus the unproven 35 year old and the low probability of 30 years of success. No amount of arguing is going to change that.
Wake isn't one of the worst P5 jobs though. We are pretty clearly better a job than BC, Miami, VT, and Clemson. That's just within our own conference.
If Jairus Lyles doesn't hit a game-winning 3 with 0.5 seconds left against Vermont, this thread does not exist.I like new hires on pure emotion. They always work out.
If Jairus Lyles doesn't hit a game-winning 3 with 0.5 seconds left against Vermont, this thread does not exist.
All the great businesses are built by people in their 30s and 40s. After that, they are just reaping the benefit of what they set up. Same is true with college basketball. Coach K and Roy would have no chance to recreate what they did at their ages now. They just have it on autoset now. It's a young man's game for a reason. It takes nearly every waking minute of focus and effort in recruiting and coaching. Old people just have a lot less probability of successfully pulling that off because they are well...old. Manning was a bad hire because he was already without fire (do to his NBA earnings) and not smart.
But you are correct we disagree. If Wake keeps doing it your way the results in my opinion will continue to be predictable.
Mike White did at age 37. Archie Miller did at age 35. All else equal, I would prefer a younger guy. All else equal, I would prefer a guy with Wake Forest ties. But, I am not going to set those as the only criteria.
Not my only criteria. But your examples are the classic reason your logic is so messed up. Those 2 dudes are now the head coaches at Florida and Indiana respectfully. We had 0 chance of getting them over those schools. You want to wait until someone is a name coach with the resume and then hire them. It will be far too late--just like it was with those 2.
We need to hire someone before they get there and because we have inside information that others do not have as to how much hustle and smartness they have--which is why Miller and Kelsey are such good choices.
We do fundamentally disagree. From my perspective, i will take the proven 50 year old and the high probability of 15 years of success versus the unproven 35 year old and the low probability of 30 years of success. No amount of arguing is going to change that.
Wake isn't one of the worst P5 jobs though. We are pretty clearly better a job than BC, Miami, VT, and Clemson. That's just within our own conference.
FWIW, Wellman thought he had inside information on [name redacted]. So, that plan probably isn't foolproof.
Agree strongly with PH. And Wellman has no information. Have you ever watched that guy walk to his seat at the Joel? He heads there as quickly as possible with his head down hoping no one speaks to him. He has been doing that for 20 years--which is exactly how he lives life--he thinks he knows it all and looks straight down with blinkers.
Even higher ups at Wake can hardly get a meeting with the guy. He is like a PG dribbling the ball up the floor without ever looking up. The results in life are predictable.
Who is the 50 year old with 15 years of success you have in mind? Could we get him over other programs? Could we afford to pay him the big bucks he will command?
The game has changed. We can’t assume a top mid-major coach will want to come to Wake. We definitely can’t assume he would choose Wake.
We need to get a guy before he gets that mid-major job and has success.
Couldn’t hurt, but [name redacted] also coached at UMBC